2012 ENERGY BENCHMARKING REPORT San Francisco Municipal Buildings. September 2013

Transcription

1 2012 ENERGY BENCHMARKING REPORT San Francisco Municipal Buildings September 2013

2 Cover Photo: City Hall. Opened in (Credit: davidyuweb / flickr) Among San Francisco s 32 office buildings, City Hall had the seventh lowest Energy Use Intensity in 2012 and earned a preliminary ENERGY STAR rating of 90, indicating that it performed better than 90 percent of similar office buildings nationwide. (Owner: Real Estate Division) 2

3 Acknowledgements Gathering the information necessary to complete this report involved contributions of time and expertise by numerous people at 26 different departments. This report marks only the second time that the City and County of San Francisco has publicly disclosed the relative energy consumption of its buildings, and includes many facilities that were not part of the 2011 report. Continued care went into ensuring that the data was as complete and accurate as possible. Special thanks to Dan Heffernan of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Power Enterprise for help with this project. SFPUC Power Enterprise staff: Hina Dave John Doyle Darryl Dunn Anna Fedman Dan Heffernan Angie Lee David Robinett SF Environment staff: Barry Hooper Calla Ostrander Mark Palmer Sachiko Tanikawa Nick Young Climate Liaisons and other City department staff: Airport: Houshang Esmaili Animal Care and Control: Liam Curry Arts Commission: Rebekah Krell, Judy Nemzoff Asian Art Museum: Erik Cline California Academy of Sciences: Ari Harding Convention Facilities / Moscone: Steve Basic, Corrine Mehigan District Attorney: Martha Knutzen Emergency Management: Vivina Santos Fine Arts Museums: Mike Badger Fire Department: Rhab Boughn, Tania Fokin Fleet Management / Central Shops: Dan Coleman Human Services Agency: John Murray Juvenile Probation: Catherine McGuire, Sheila Layton Police Department: Ivan Sequeira Public Health: Richard Bitanga, Max Bunuan, Diana Kenyon, John Lee, Anson Moon, Tyrone Navarro, Marc Slavin Public Library: Roberto Lombardi Public Works: Cynthia Chono, Patrick Rivera Real Estate: Marta Bayol, Lesley Giovannelli, Rob Reiter, John Updike Recreation & Park: Ana Alvarez, Erin Anderson SFMTA: Terry Fahey, Rob Malone, Marty Mellera, Rosa Rankin, Ken Yee SFUSD: Jennifer Helfrich, Nik Kaestner Sheriff: Kevin Lyons Technology (DT): Brian Roberts War Memorial: Kevin Kelly SFPUC Project Manager: Jonathan Cherry Please any questions about this report to: energydata@sfwater.org 3

4 Table of Contents Executive Summary 5 Introduction 7 San Francisco s Approach to Benchmarking 8 Energy Use in San Francisco s Municipal Buildings Energy Benchmarking Results 14 Putting the Results in Context 32 Appendix A: Key to Benchmarking Notes 33 Appendix B: List of Departments and Acronyms 34 Appendix C: EUI Normalized by Hours of Operation 34 4

5 Executive Summary Background This second annual report details the energy performance of almost 450 of San Francisco s municipal facilities during calendar year 2012, including more than 46 million square feet of building area. In February 2011, the San Francisco Existing Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance was approved by the Board of Supervisors and signed by Mayor Edwin M. Lee. The ordinance requires owners of non-residential buildings over 10,000 square feet to annually benchmark and disclose the energy performance of their buildings, using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Portfolio Manager tool to obtain ENERGY STAR ratings when possible. As the owner and occupant of hundreds of buildings, the City and County of San Francisco has chosen to lead by example and provide transparency about its own operations. The report also includes data on over 130 San Francisco Unified School District facilities. By distributing this report on behalf of 26 different agencies, the SFPUC hopes to provide a fresh perspective on these public facilities, highlighting energy performance successes and focusing attention and resources on buildings that may benefit from energy improvements. Key Findings Comparison by Building Type: The detailed charts in this report give a rich amount of information about each location. For each facility type, the reader can see the individual facilities ranked in descending order of Energy Use Intensity (EUI), plus an indication of each facility s annual carbon footprint and a profile of what times of year are most (and least) energy intensive. Summary charts provide insights into the energy use of each municipal facility type. ENERGY STAR Ratings: The ENERGY STAR rating system is designed for commercial buildings, so only some municipal facility types are eligible for a rating. Of the municipal facilities eligible for a rating, almost 80% outperformed the national median for similar buildings. Only 5 out of 139 rating-eligible facilities ranked in the bottom 25% compared to their national peers. For the second year, eleven City facilities performed in the top 25% nationwide (the threshold for the ENERGY STAR label) and 42 K-12 schools also met that threshold in Comparison to Prior : The improving energy use trend noted in the 2011 report continued this year. The overall EUI of benchmarked facilities improved 3.6% from 2011 and 4.4% compared to The average 2012 carbon footprint of benchmarked facilities improved 5.1% from 2011 and 7.0% compared to However, numerous factors may influence this trend and further detailed analysis is needed beyond the data presented here to identify all of the specific causes. Calendar 2012 Highlights: Benchmarking results are provided for 446 municipal facilities across 29 facility types, including the addition of SFUSD buildings. For each facility type, buildings are ranked in order of Energy Use Intensity (EUI, or energy use per square foot). Overall in 2012, the EUI for municipal buildings improved 3.6% from the prior year, and the overall carbon footprint decreased 5.1% from the prior year. Nearly 80% of San Francisco facilities in ENERGY STAR building types performed equal to or better than the national average. Only five locations ranked in the bottom 25% compared to similar buildings nationwide. San Francisco City Hall is among the locations that scored high enough for the ENERGY STAR label in Making Use of the Results The findings suggest that San Francisco s municipal buildings performed well in However, the results here are just a first step. The wide 5

6 variation in energy performance within most facility types suggests there are many opportunities for improvement. This report is one part of efforts by the SFPUC and other departments to track and improve the energy efficiency of municipal buildings. The SFPUC offers a range of energy efficiency services such as energy audits and green building commissioning that can identify technical deficiencies and recommend operations and maintenance improvements. The role of building occupants in using energy wisely is also crucial. Developing this annual report continues to be a major undertaking supported by numerous departments. Each department should look in more detail at facilities that appear as outliers in the data and provide data improvements where necessary to improve the benchmarking process in future years. The SFPUC is hopeful that the format of this report provides value to municipal building owners, managers, occupants, and the general public, and welcomes suggestions about how to improve this report in future years. 6

7 decades. Combined with the efforts of individual departments, these energy improvements in existing buildings save the City millions of dollars per year in energy costs while also improving the indoor environment for building occupants. Additionally, as public facilities are built or undergo major renovations, they must meet the energy performance and LEED Gold standards of the City s Green Building Ordinance and Environment Code Chapter 7. However, to most effectively take action, building owners and occupants need to be informed of cost-effective opportunities for energy savings. With this in mind, the Board of Supervisors approved the San Francisco Existing Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance in February 2011, amending the Environment Code. The ordinance requires owners of non-residential buildings larger than 10,000 square feet (both privately and municipally owned) to annually disclose their buildings energy performance by benchmarking against similar facilities. Introduction The City and County of San Francisco is strongly committed to reducing its impact on the environment and its contributions to climate change. Through key policy documents including the Climate Action Plan and the 2011 Updated Electricity Resource Plan, the City has laid out strategies to achieve its ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. One of the actions the City is taking in support of those commitments is to reduce the energy consumption of public buildings. San Francisco s public buildings are fortunate to obtain their electricity from GHG-free sources, primarily the City s Hetch Hetchy Power system. However, responsible use of this public resource demands that the City make the most efficient use of this energy. Also, these buildings consume natural gas and steam, which contribute to climate change. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) has offered energy efficiency services to its power customers for the past three With support from 25 other departments that own or lease full buildings, the SFPUC has issued this report to provide San Francisco s agencies and the general public a better understanding of how the City s municipal facilities perform. This report identifies high performing buildings as well as opportunities for improvement, and is an attempt by the City to lead by example and provide transparency related to government operations. The information in this report is just a first step. Together with the more detailed information gained from energy audits and the in-depth knowledge of building owners and occupants, this report will help City departments target resources to locations that could benefit the most from energy-related improvements. Photo: Multi-Service Center North. Built in The Polk Street homeless shelter used 19% less energy in calendar year 2012 than the previous year. The SFPUC completed upgrades to the homeless shelter s heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems in early 2012, after completing a lighting retrofit project in (Owner: Human Services Agency) 7

8 San Francisco s Approach to Benchmarking In 2011, San Francisco joined a growing number of cities that have recently adopted ordinances requiring building owners to benchmark and publicly disclose the energy performance of their facilities each year. Energy benchmarking is simply a way to track the performance of a building over time and compare that building to other similar structures, in order to help identify opportunities for improvement. While the concept of energy benchmarking is simple, the undertaking of accurately performing this process for San Francisco s hundreds of municipal buildings continues to be relatively complex. As the City s public electricity provider, the SFPUC has opted to coordinate the required data gathering effort and publish a consolidated annual report for all City departments. This second annual report builds upon last year s effort, while also expanding the number of benchmarked municipal buildings by almost 50%. Over the past two years, SFPUC staff has continued to work with representatives of 25 different departments to gather, verify, and update the facility data necessary for this report. This report includes more facilities than required by the ordinance. Although the ordinance only requires benchmarking buildings larger than 10,000 square feet, this municipal report includes buildings of smaller size where a meaningful benchmark could be established. The smallest buildings park restrooms and kiosks, for example are excluded. Also, this report includes numerous buildings owned by the City outside of the geographic boundaries of San Francisco, as well as some privately owned buildings that are occupied in full by City departments. San Francisco s ordinance, like those in other cities, identifies the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Portfolio Manager tool as the preferred method of benchmarking for private-sector buildings. As a wellrecognized national rating tool that draws on the best available energy use data, Portfolio Manager (and the associated ENERGY STAR rating system) is an excellent way for owners and occupants of eligible facilities to see how their buildings stack up against local and national peers. Eligible buildings can receive a score (with 50 being the median and 100 the best) that compares a structure to similar buildings nationwide. The inclusion of K-12 schools in this year s report has greatly increased the number of rating-eligible facilities compared to the 2011 annual report. However, the bulk of the City s municipal building types the libraries, fire stations, museums, recreation centers, etc. are still benchmarked based on on-site Energy Use Intensity (EUI), which is a measure of annual energy use per square foot of building area. The resulting EUI for each facility is then compared to the EUI of other San Francisco municipal buildings of a similar type. While national average EUI figures are published for a variety of building types, these figures are not normalized for climate and thus are not an ideal method of understanding how well a building in San Francisco performs. A building in San Francisco s mild climate would tend to perform relatively well compared to its national peers on the basis of EUI, without revealing much about the building s actual efficiency. Another decision was the use of on-site rather than source EUI as the primary metric in this report, due to the City s source of electricity. To derive source EUI, the EPA s Portfolio Manager tool uses national averages to convert electricity used in a facility to the total energy required to supply this electricity. In most cases, electricity delivery involves substantial conversion losses through the burning of fossil fuel, plus some losses due to transmission and distribution of the resulting power. Portfolio Manager recommends an average site-source ratio of 3.34 to account for these losses. However, the SFPUC s Hetch Hetchy Power system and some local distributed generation provide nearly all of the electricity needed by San Francisco s municipal buildings. Since these power sources do not involve converting fossil fuels to electricity, use of a national average site-source ratio would be misleading. Therefore, all comparisons in this report (with the exception of ENERGY STAR ratings) are based on site energy use. While this benchmarking report is a new step toward identifying energy efficiency opportunities, there are several existing efforts to track and 8

9 report the energy efficiency of the City s buildings. Some City departments (e.g. the Real Estate Division and the California Academy of Sciences) were already using Portfolio Manager to benchmark specific facilities prior to the requirements of the new ordinance. Also, the SFPUC has distributed quarterly Energy Usage Reports to every department for several years, giving departments regular information about fluctuations in energy use for each of their sites. The SFPUC and other departments have also annually contributed energy data for every City facility as part of the Climate Action Plan process coordinated by the Department of the Environment. It is the hope of the SFPUC that the format of this report will be helpful to City departments and other readers as a way to supplement and improve upon other information sources about San Francisco s municipal sustainability performance. As changes are made to the EPA s ENERGY STAR system, and as San Francisco s private sector buildings begin to release their own energy performance data, the SFPUC will look for ways to further refine its benchmarking methodology in order to improve the accuracy and relevancy of its reporting and to help lead the way in improving access to energy data in San Francisco and the nation. San Francisco municipal facility types eligible for ENERGY STAR rating: K-12 School (NEW for 2012 report) Mental Health Center (Medical Office) Hospital General Office Courthouse (NEW for 2012 report) Warehouse Wastewater Treatment Plant San Francisco municipal facility types not eligible for rating: Convention Center Performance Hall Art/Cultural Center Museum Childcare / Teen Center College / Adult Education Library Homeless Service Medical Clinic Veterinarian Parking Garage Fire Station Police Station Emergency Center Jail / Correctional Clubhouse Recreation Center Swimming Pool Camp Other Recreational Building Corporation Yard / Vehicle Repair Other Shop Transit Station Airport 9

10 Energy Use in San Francisco s Municipal Buildings Information Sources and Assumptions Creating an accurate energy performance benchmark of San Francisco s municipal buildings requires information from numerous sources. Energy data: Electricity, natural gas, and steam data is stored in the SFPUC s energy accounting database, which contains metered monthly usage for all utility meters where billing is managed by the SFPUC. Some additional natural gas data was obtained from PG&E, in cases where the site pays PG&E directly for natural gas and the meter information was provided by the individual department to the SFPUC. Natural gas data for SFUSD facilities was provided by SFUSD. There are 17 facilities where a portion of energy use records are missing. These are listed separately at the end of the report. 1 Facility data: Accurate facility data is just as important as accurate energy use data, in order to reliably benchmark a building. As part of the initial report (calendar year 2011), the SFPUC and other departments engaged in a thorough verification process to review available building and operations data and supply additional detail for the benchmarking effort. This verification process continued for the additional facilities added to the current report, and departments were also asked to provide any updates for buildings that were previously included. For a description of this process, see the inset on page 13. This report generally refers to facilities rather than buildings, because in many cases there are energy meters shared by multiple buildings at one location. These locations are benchmarked as campuses. For instance, the Airport is listed as one facility, but contains 70 individual buildings. San Francisco General Hospital is benchmarked as a single facility but is actually a campus of more than 15 individual buildings. Similarly, Moscone Center North and South are considered as a campus due to their shared mechanical systems, as are the War Memorial Veterans Building and Opera House. In some cases, facilities contain more than one space type. For instance, the Hall of Justice is a mixed-use facility that contains offices, a courthouse, and jail areas. Where this would affect the ENERGY STAR rating, multiple space types were entered into EPA s Portfolio Manager. Departments also supplied the SFPUC with the size of parking garages and parking lots connected to buildings. Where attached parking would affect the ENERGY STAR rating, this data was entered into Portfolio Manager as an additional space type. However, it is important to note that the EUI calculations in this report include parking garage area as part of a facility s square footage, which in most cases decreases the EUI of a building due to the lower energy intensity of a typical parking garage. Parking lots are not included in the EUI calculations. Civic Center steam loop: Two historic Civic Center buildings obtain steam from the NRG Energy Center steam loop but do not have individual steam meters: Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and the DPH Central Office at 101 Grove. To generate an estimated EUI for these buildings, the unmetered portion of Civic Center steam use was apportioned to these two buildings based on their square footage. These buildings are not eligible for an ENERGY STAR rating due to the absence of accurate steam meter data. (A steam sub-meter was installed at City Hall at the end of 2011, providing accurate steam use data for City Hall.) Snapshot of Energy Use In calendar year 2012, the overall Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of the 445 benchmarked facilities (excluding the Airport) was kbtu of on-site 1 Excluded are any amounts of fuel oil that may be burned in several dual-fuel boilers, to ensure readiness in case of a natural gas curtailment event. 10

11 Energy Use in Municipal Facilities: Calendar 2012 The buildings benchmarked in this report represent over 72% of the electricity, natural gas, and district steam used in San Francisco s municipal facilities in calendar year Shown in dark green, these 446 facilities (including San Francisco International Airport) used a total of 3,791,754 MMBtu of onsite energy. This report also provides partial benchmark results for an additional 5% of municipal facility energy use, though these facilities cannot be accurately benchmarked on a per-square-foot basis. 22% of the on-site energy used in municipal facilities is excluded from this report, as indicated. [Note that the figures for the Housing Authority (SFHA) and Port are partial totals that exclude non-sfpuc energy such as natural gas.] Departments Not Covered by Ordinance 4.8% of energy use City College 2.7% SFHA (Electricity Only) 1.5% Other 0.5% Reporting Independently Port of San Francisco 3.0% of energy use (Electricity Only) SFMTA Non-Building 5.0% SFPUC Non-Building 4.0% Streetlights Excluded City Facilities 1.8% 14.6% of energy use Treasure Island 1.8% Other Non-Building 1.0% Inactive Buildings or Not Covered by Ordinance 0.9% Benchmarked with ENERGY STAR (139 Facilities) 949,490 MMBtu 18.2% of energy use Partial Benchmark 5.2% of energy use Buildings of Unknown Size 0.05% Buildings with Incomplete Meter Data 1.0% Water and Wastewater Treatment Buildings 4.1% Airport EUI Only (1 Facility) 1,497,263 MMBtu 28.6% of energy use Benchmarked EUI Only (306 Facilities) 1,345,002 MMBtu 25.7% of energy use Benchmarked Facilities (Including Airport) 72.5% of energy use 11

12 Public Safety 1,640,517 sq.ft. 3.5% Convention Centers 2,071,000 sq.ft. 4.5% Hospitals 2,088,030 sq.ft. 4.5% Service, Repair, and Storage 2,526,002 sq.ft. 5.5% Performance Halls 1,061,450 sq.ft. 2.3% Museums and Art 1,223,551 sq.ft. 2.6% Recreation Facilities 1,325,653 sq.ft. 2.9% Offices 3,496,611 sq.ft. 7.6% Parking Garages 5,331,484 sq.ft. 11.5% Libraries 585,181 sq.ft. 1.3% Health & Human Services 371,019 sq.ft. 0.8% Airport 15,579,508 sq.ft. 33.7% Benchmarked Square Footage, by Building Category (Total Benchmarked Building Area = 46,278,327 sq ft) Transit Stations 363,000 sq.ft. 0.8% Education 8,615,321 sq.ft. 18.6% Museums and Art 202,100 MMBtu 5.3% Recreation Facilities 122,998 MMBtu 3.2% Public Safety 157,755 MMBtu 4.2% Convention Centers 122,703 MMBtu 3.2% Hospitals 660,084 MMBtu 17.4% Performance Halls 78,960 MMBtu 2.1% Service, Repair, and Storage 166,614 MMBtu 4.4% Offices 255,076 MMBtu 6.7% Libraries 40,641 MMBtu 1.1% Airport 1,497,263 MMBtu 39.5% Benchmarked Energy Use, by Building Category (Calendar 2012 Benchmarked Energy Use = 3,791,754 MMBtu) Health & Human Services 46,010 MMBtu 1.2% Transit Stations 21, % Education 378,045 MMBtu 10.0% Parking Garages 42,281 MMBtu 1.1% energy per square foot of building area. 2 This was an improvement of 3.6% from the 2011 EUI of The overall EUI comparisons provided in the report exclude the Airport, due to its large size and lack of building-level meter detail. Additionally, some Airport natural gas data prior to 2011 is not available to the SFPUC. Including the Airport, the total EUI decreased 2.3% from 2011 to The 2011 EUI figure differs somewhat from the number cited in the 2011 report, primarily due to the inclusion of SFUSD facilities in this report. Note that the overall year-to-year comparison includes some buildings that were under renovation or that may have experienced other changes in use affecting their energy use. The site EUI figures shown in this report are not weather normalized Comparing the two charts above, some building types consume energy out of proportion to their size. For instance, the two hospitals comprise only 4.5% of the benchmarked square footage, but consumed 17% of benchmarked energy in 2012 (EUI of 316.1). This is largely due to the hospitals operating hours and intensity of use. On the other hand, parking garages (which are unheated) make up 11.5% of benchmarked square footage but used only 1.1% of the year s benchmarked energy use (EUI of only 7.9). Museums have a higher than average EUI (likely due to to account for year-to-year fluctuations in the number of heating and cooling degree days. The ENERGY STAR ratings, where available, are weather normalized. 12

13 unique climate control needs), while schools on average are less energy intensive (partly because they are closed in the summer). The average EUI figure for each building type is found in the next section of the report. Municipal facilities use GHG-free SFPUC electricity, natural gas supplied by PG&E or an aggregator (either the California Department of General Services or SPURR), and steam supplied by NRG. To compare these forms of on-site energy use, units have been converted throughout this report to British thermal units (Btu) of energy. 4 The charts below show the different energy sources used at the 445 benchmarked facilities plus the Airport, as well as the total associated greenhouse gas emissions. 5 Sources and Verification of Facility Data To develop a list of facilities, SFPUC staff began with a list of over 1,000 individually metered municipal facilities in the Power Enterprise energy accounting database, and cross-referenced this data with databases of owned and leased facilities maintained by the City s Real Estate Division and Capital Planning Committee. Next, the SFPUC screened out facilities owned by agencies not covered by the ordinance, such as the Housing Authority and City College. The Port of San Francisco, which maintains its own facility records and natural gas use data, will independently report its energy performance data. District Steam 66,904,500 lbs 79,884 MMBtu 2% of energy use District Steam 6,657 tons CO 2 6% of emissions Electricity 0 tons CO 2 0% of emissions Of the 90 facility categories in the database, those that did not meet the definition of building were also screened out. These included bridges, bus stops, fire pumps, sirens, street lights, traffic signals, water pumps, etc. While extremely small buildings such as park restrooms and kiosks were excluded from the report, numerous other buildings smaller than the ordinance s 10,000 square foot threshold were included where they provided a meaningful comparison to other buildings. Natural Gas 16,402,393 therms 1,640,239 MMBtu 43% of energy use Electricity 607,135 MWh 2,071,631 MMBtu 55% of energy use Natural Gas 95,954 tons CO 2 94% of emissions To maximize the accuracy of the facility list used in the initial 2011 report, the SFPUC displayed all known facility data in a web-based survey tool and asked each department to verify its list of facilities and the associated data. The SFPUC supplied a list of meters associated with each facility, for each department to correct meter matchups if necessary. Energy Use and GHG Emissions, by Fuel Type (Calendar 2012 Benchmarked Energy Use = 3,791,754 MMBtu) 4 Conversion factors are those referenced by EPA s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager: (3.412 kbtu per kwh of electricity; 100 kbtu per therm of natural gas; kbtu per lb of district steam). 1 MMBtu = 1,000 kbtu = 1,000,000 Btu. 5 GHG emissions from SFPUC electricity are zero for Natural gas emissions use national averages cited by ENERGY STAR (11.7 lbs CO2 per therm of natural gas). Steam emissions provided by NRG (0.199 lbs CO2 per pound of steam). Representatives from all 26 affected departments (including SFUSD for the 2012 report) verified the data and provided corrections and missing information. Data verified through this process included building square footage, number of building occupants, operating hours, year built (and renovated), and other ENERGY STAR facility characteristics depending on building type. The SFPUC and other Departments were able to verify most facility data. Square footage information and partial meter data from a small fraction of relevant facilities is still unknown. A partial benchmark of those facilities is included in this report, and an effort will be made to obtain the missing data in future years. 13

14 2012 Energy Benchmarking Results Energy Use Intensity (EUI) for all Facilities As described previously, the primary method of benchmarking the facilities in this report is to compare the on-site annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of each facility to other San Francisco municipal facilities of the same type. By listing the facilities of each type in descending order of EUI, the reader can quickly see which facilities consumed the most energy per square foot, and which consumed the least. While the charts on the far right-hand side of pages show the total energy use for each facility, the primary comparison is on a per-square-foot basis. This EUI comparison is helpful, but not perfect. The wide variation in energy performance within many facility types indicates the potential for energy efficiency retrofit projects to improve the poorer performers. However, each department should look in more detail at the list of its buildings to help interpret the results. Some facility types are susceptible to having complex energy meter arrangements that do not always correspond to discrete buildings (e.g. locations in Golden Gate Park and other Recreation & Park clubhouses and playgrounds), which means the EUI for some facilities includes energy use from adjacent areas as well. To help track changes in energy use over time, a comparison to calendar year 2011 EUI is included for each site. This comparison is also not perfect, as it is not normalized to account for annual fluctuations in weather, but does provide informative results. Note that in cases where a facility was vacant or under construction for an extended period of time during 2011 or 2012, a note (4) is included after the facility name. ENERGY STAR Ratings Since the ENERGY STAR rating system was developed primarily for commercial buildings, the majority of municipal buildings in San Francisco are building types that are not eligible for a rating. However, of the 446 municipal facilities benchmarked in this report, 139 of them do have building characteristics and available data that make them eligible for an ENERGY STAR rating. The SFPUC entered data for those 139 facilities into the EPA s Portfolio Manager system, which generated ratings that allow a comparison to national averages. Unlike the EUI data, these ratings take into account local climate and weather conditions, as well as building characteristics such as weekly operating hours and number of occupants. In general, seven types of San Francisco municipal facilities fall into a category eligible for an ENERGY STAR rating: Office buildings, Courthouses, Mental Health Centers (Medical Office), Hospitals, Warehouses, K-12 Schools, and Wastewater Treatment Plants. Of the facilities in appropriate categories, some did not qualify for a rating because they did not meet ENERGY STAR s minimum operating thresholds (for instance, the buildings were too small or did not have any full-time occupants). The ratings for these non-qualifying facilities are San Francisco Facilities in ENERGY STAR Categories: Comparison to National Median Rating General Medical # of Rated % of Rated Courthouse Hospital Warehouse K-12 School Office Office Facilities Facilities Top 25% ( rating) % 2nd Quarter (50-74 rating) % 3rd Quarter (25-49 rating) % Bottom 25% (0-24 rating) % TOTAL % 14

15 listed as N.Q. along with explanations. Several other locations are qualifying building types but the SFPUC did not have adequate facility data to generate an accurate rating. Finally, the City s wastewater treatment plants are not rated in this report, as ENERGY STAR s methodology for rating these facilities requires more detailed monthly operations data than was available at the publication time of this report. As can be seen in the chart above, 53 of the 139 rating-eligible facilities achieved a preliminary score in the top 25% of similar buildings nationwide, and therefore appear tentatively qualified to receive the ENERGY STAR label for calendar year Almost 80% of ratingeligible San Francisco facilities performed equal to or better than the national median for similar buildings. Only five facilities were rated in the bottom 25% compared to similar buildings nationwide. Individual ratings for all of these facilities can be seen in the charts on the following pages, grouped by facility type. The top 11 (non-school 7 ) facilities are listed individually to the right side of this page. Carbon Footprint The GHG emissions of each facility (on a per square foot basis) is provided to help integrate this benchmarking report with departments annual Climate Action Plan reporting. The average 2012 carbon footprint of the benchmarked facilities (5.26 pounds of CO2 emissions per square foot) improved 5.1% from 2011 and 7.0% compared to One key difference between San Francisco s municipal buildings and their national counterparts is that electricity in municipal buildings is GHG-free electricity from the SFPUC s Hetch Hetchy Power system. This difference is not taken into account by the ENERGY STAR ratings, thus 6 Preliminary ratings for calendar year 2012 obtained in June To obtain the ENERGY STAR label, the building owner must have the results validated by a licensed engineer or architect, and submit a formal application to the EPA. 7 Although preliminary ENERGY STAR ratings are provided for K-12 schools on the following pages, further site investigations are needed before the scores can be validated. Some operating characteristics (number of personal computers and number of walk-in freezer/refrigeration units) were estimated at each school based on national per-square-foot averages. becomes an additional lens with which to view the relative performance of the facilities in this report. Emissions factors used in this report are explained on the next page. Data Uncertainties and Exceptions As described in the previous section of this report, a small number of facilities received a partial benchmark due to missing square footage or meter information. These facilities are listed separately on the last page of the benchmarking results. In addition to these partially benchmarked buildings, there are notes (#) beside the names of some facilities. These notes clarify situations where energy or facility data is treated as a special case, or where facilities need further investigation in future years. Among these are facilities that are in eligible ENERGY STAR categories, but do not meet the EPA s thresholds for ratings. For a key to these notes, see Appendix A. The 11 office and medical office facilities that appear qualified for the ENERGY STAR label for calendar year 2012 (subject to validation) are: Department of Public Health: Mission Mental Health Services Department of Public Works: 1680 Mission St Human Services Agency: Real Estate Division: Human Services Agency Headquarters MediCal Harrison Social Services Mission 25 Van Ness Ave City Hall One South Van Ness Public Defender's Office San Francisco Public Library: Library Support Services Building SFPUC: Moccasin Administration Building 15

16 How to Interpret Data on the Following Pages The 2012 Energy Benchmarking results are grouped by facility type, and provide key data points about each facility, as well as the facility s energy performance in calendar year General category of building, corresponding to energy use snapshot in previous chapter Specific facility type, allowing a comparison of similar facilities to each other See Appendix B for a list of department acronyms. Each facility s preliminary 2012 ENERGY STAR rating is shown here. Facilities in the top 25% of similar buildings nationwide are indicated with a green dot. Facilities in the bottom 25% are indicated with a red dot. N/A indicates a facility type not eligible for a rating, or that inadequate information is available. N.Q. indicates the facility is an eligible category but does not qualify for a rating based on EPA s operating thresholds. Each facility s estimated 2012 carbon footprint is shown here as pounds of CO2 emissions per square foot of building area. For electricity in 2012, GHG emissions associated with SFPUC electricity were zero. Natural gas emissions are derived from national averages cited by ENERGY STAR (11.7 lbs CO2 per therm of natural gas). GHG emissions from steam provided by NRG Energy Center (0.199 lbs CO2 per pound of steam). Facility Dpt. Built Renov. Building Area (sq. ft.) Monthly Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) EUI Change Since 2011 Annual Site EUI (kbtu/sq.ft.) Calendar 2012 ENERGY STAR Carbon Footprint (lbs CO2 / sq.ft.) Annual Site MMBtu Health & Human Services ,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 Medical Clinic - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D -15.0% Potrero Hill Health Center DPH , % 95.5 N/A 7.44 Curry Senior Service Center DPH , % 94.0 N/A 8.27 Mental Health Center - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D 1.9% Chinatown Child Development Center DPH , % Mission Mental Health Services DPH , % District steam shown in dark blue This section includes facility characteristics for each location facility owner, year built, year renovated, and total building area in square feet. The fluctuation in monthly EUI is shown throughout the calendar year, to provide a sense of the times of year with highest and lowest energy use. The change in annual EUI from 2011 to 2012 is shown in this column for each facility. An improvement of more than 10% is shown in green. An EUI increase of more than 10% is shown in red. Facilities that were unoccupied for prolonged periods during either 2011 or 2012 are indicated with a note (4) next to the facility name. Natural gas use shown in light blue Electricity use shown in yellow 2012 Energy Use Intensity (EUI) for each facility, in kbtu of total on-site energy, per square foot of building area San Francisco s average 2012 EUI for each facility type is provided on the top row here, and also shown as a gray bar for comparison to individual facilities. Bars shown in this area indicate total 2012 energy use for each facility, in MMBtu of on-site energy. Note: Chart scales vary for different facility types. 16

17 Facility Dpt. Built Renov. Building Area (sq. ft.) Monthly Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) EUI Change Since 2011 Annual Site EUI (kbtu/sq.ft.) Calendar 2012 ENERGY STAR Carbon Footprint (lbs CO2 / sq.ft.) Annual Site MMBtu Convention Centers ,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 Convention Center - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D 4.6% Moscone Center West CFD , % 73.9 N/A 4.40 Moscone Center North & South (1) CFD ,296, % 50.5 N/A 2.63 Performance Halls ,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 Performance Hall - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D N/A Bill Graham Civic Auditorium (steam unmetered) (2) RED ,250 N/A 84.0 N/A War Memorial Veterans Building & Opera House WMPAC , % 76.8 N/A 5.75 Davies Symphony Hall / Zellerbach Rehearsal Hall (1) WMPAC , % 56.2 N/A 2.96 Museums and Art ,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 Art/Cultural Center - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D 2.8% GGP -- Sharon Arts Studio (3) RPD , % 92.7 N/A Randall Museum RPD , % 75.1 N/A 6.44 Mission Cultural Center for Latino Arts SFAC , % 34.9 N/A 2.29 SOMArts Cultural Center SFAC , % 32.3 N/A 0.90 Harvey Milk Center for the Arts RPD , % 30.0 N/A 1.73 African American Art & Culture Complex SFAC , % 28.3 N/A 2.04 Bayview Opera House SFAC , % 9.8 N/A 0.00 Arts Commission Window Site / Gallery SFAC , % 8.2 N/A 0.23 Museum - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D -7.3% California Palace of the Legion of Honor FAMSF , % N/A GGP -- Conservatory of Flowers (3) RPD , % N/A Asian Art Museum AAM , % N/A 8.57 De Young Museum FAMSF , % N/A 9.90 California Academy of Sciences CAS , % N/A 5.70 Coit Tower RPD , % 52.8 N/A

18 Facility Dpt. Built Renov. Building Area (sq. ft.) Monthly Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) EUI Change Since 2011 Annual Site EUI (kbtu/sq.ft.) Calendar 2012 ENERGY STAR Carbon Footprint (lbs CO2 / sq.ft.) Annual Site MMBtu Education ,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Childcare / Teen Center - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D 0.5% San Miguel CDC (4) SFUSD , % N/A Argonne CDC SFUSD , % N/A 9.34 Zaida T Rodriguez Early Education SFUSD , % 99.3 N/A 8.29 Noriega CDC SFUSD , % 60.8 N/A 5.27 Earl P Mills Community Center HSA , % 59.3 N/A 4.52 Commodore Stockton CDC SFUSD , % 51.2 N/A 3.25 Junipero Serra Annex CDC SFUSD , % 46.3 N/A 1.31 Jefferson Early Education SFUSD , % 45.4 N/A 3.33 Sojourner Truth Child Center HSA , % 38.6 N/A 3.41 Tule Elk Park CDC SFUSD , % 35.7 N/A 3.49 Theresa Mahler CDC SFUSD , % 28.6 N/A 1.23 MLK Child Care Center HSA , % 28.0 N/A 2.74 Playmates Nursery SFUSD , % 27.6 N/A 1.50 Mission CDC SFUSD , % 27.0 N/A 1.59 Leola M Havard Early Education SFUSD , % 26.5 N/A 2.41 SFUSD -- SPEd Medical Therapy Unit (Laguna) SFUSD , % 15.2 N/A 0.76 John McLaren CDC SFUSD , % 14.9 N/A 1.39 Shorey Childrens Center HSA , % 10.0 N/A 0.64 College / Adult Education - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D 0.6% SFPD Academy SFPD , % N/A GGP -- Senior Center RPD , % N/A Southeast Community Facility and Greenhouses (5) SFPUC , % 96.1 N/A 9.79 Sheriff Community Programs / Five Keys Adult School SHF , % 61.2 N/A 3.08 K-12 School - San Francisco Average J F M A M J J A S O N D -6.5% Mission Education Center Elementary SFUSD , % Principals Center Collaborative (Old Laguna Honda) SFUSD , % Ida B Wells High SFUSD , % Independence High SFUSD , % Robert Louis Stevenson Elementary SFUSD , % Visitacion Valley Middle SFUSD , % El Dorado Elementary SFUSD , % Jose Ortega Elementary SFUSD , % Raoul Wallenberg High SFUSD , % International Studies Academy at Enola Maxwell SFUSD , % George Peabody Elementary SFUSD , % Paul Revere Elementary SFUSD , % Hilltop County Community High / Sunshine Building SFUSD , % Sanchez Elementary SFUSD , % Ulloa Elementary SFUSD , %

19 Facility Dpt. Built Renov. Building Area (sq. ft.) Monthly Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) EUI Change Since 2011 Annual Site EUI (kbtu/sq.ft.) Calendar 2012 Sunset Elementary SFUSD , % Downtown High SFUSD , % School of the Arts / Academy of Arts and Sciences SFUSD , % Buena Vista / Horace Mann SFUSD , % Philip and Sala Burton High SFUSD , % Sunnyside Elementary SFUSD , % Claire Lilienthal (K-2 Madison Campus) SFUSD , % E R Taylor Elementary SFUSD , % Cleveland Elementary SFUSD , % Alamo Elementary SFUSD , % Lawton Elementary SFUSD , % George Moscone Elementary SFUSD , % George Washington High SFUSD , % Hillcrest Elementary SFUSD , % Alice Fong Yu Elementary SFUSD , % Leonard R Flynn Elementary SFUSD , % Presidio Middle SFUSD , % Chinese Immersion Elementary at DeAvila SFUSD , % Clarendon Elementary SFUSD , % Francis Scott Key Elementary SFUSD , % Lakeshore Elementary SFUSD , % Bessie Carmichael / Filipino Education Ctr (6-8) SFUSD , % SF International High SFUSD , % Sheridan Elementary SFUSD , % Bessie Carmichael Elementary SFUSD , % Redding Elementary SFUSD , % Lafayette Elementary SFUSD , % John O'Connell High SFUSD , % Roosevelt Middle SFUSD , % Dr William Cobb Elementary SFUSD , % Metropolitan Arts & Tech High SFUSD , % Longfellow Elementary SFUSD , % Galileo High SFUSD , % Marina Middle SFUSD , % James Denman Middle / Leadership High SFUSD , % John Muir Elementary SFUSD , % Bryant Elementary and CDC SFUSD , % Starr King Elementary SFUSD , % Glen Park Elementary SFUSD , % Bret Harte Elementary SFUSD , % New Traditions Elementary SFUSD , % Argonne Elementary SFUSD , % ENERGY STAR Carbon Footprint (lbs CO2 / sq.ft.) Annual Site MMBtu ,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 19

20 Facility Dpt. Built Renov. Building Area (sq. ft.) Monthly Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) EUI Change Since 2011 Annual Site EUI (kbtu/sq.ft.) Calendar 2012 ENERGY STAR Carbon Footprint (lbs CO2 / sq.ft.) Annual Site MMBtu ,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Dr Martin Luther King Middle SFUSD , % A P Giannini Middle SFUSD , % Malcolm X Elementary SFUSD , % Rooftop Alternative (5-8 Mayeda Campus) SFUSD , % West Portal Elementary SFUSD , % Francisco Middle SFUSD , % Rosa Parks Elementary / Raphael Weill CDC SFUSD , % Thurgood Marshall High SFUSD , % Sutro Elementary SFUSD , % Monroe Elementary SFUSD , % Former Irving M Scott School SFUSD , % Herbert Hoover Middle SFUSD , % Rooftop Alternative (K-4 Burnett Campus) SFUSD , % Jefferson Elementary SFUSD , % Cesar Chavez Elementary SFUSD , % Commodore Sloat Elementary SFUSD , % Dr Charles R Drew Elementary SFUSD , % Mission High SFUSD , % Tenderloin Elementary SFUSD , % June Jordan High / City Arts and Tech High SFUSD , % James Lick Middle SFUSD , % Visitacion Valley Elementary SFUSD , % Spring Valley Elementary SFUSD , % Claire Lilienthal (3-8 Winfield Scott Campus) SFUSD , % Abraham Lincoln High SFUSD , % Lowell High SFUSD , % Chinese Education Center SFUSD , % Sherman Elementary SFUSD , % Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy SFUSD , % Aptos Middle SFUSD , % Jean Parker Elementary SFUSD , % Balboa High SFUSD , % Alvarado Elementary SFUSD , % SF Community School SFUSD , % Edison Elementary Charter SFUSD , % Miraloma Elementary SFUSD , % Yick Wo Elementary SFUSD , % Grattan Elementary SFUSD , % Dianne Feinstein Elementary SFUSD , % Garfield Elementary SFUSD , % Frank McCoppin Elementary SFUSD , % John Yehall Chin Elementary SFUSD , %